HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Skaggs, T. H. Articles by Grieve, C. M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Skaggs, T. H. Articles by Grieve, C. M. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Skaggs, T. H. Articles by Grieve, C. M. Related Collections Water Stress Soil Salinity Root Growth/Water Uptake Models

Irrigating Forage Crops with Saline Waters

1. Volumetric Lysimeter Studies

George E. Brown, Jr., Salinity Lab., USDA-ARS, 450 W. Big Springs Rd., Riverside, CA 92507

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a volumetric lysimeter. The experiment was conducted in a facility consisting of 24 lysimeters.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Illustration of the calculation of irrigation and drainage depths based on measurements of reservoir water height.

View larger version (38K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Measured evapotranspiration (ET) in two well-watered lysimeters, expressed as the ratio of the measured ET to a reference ET0 calculated using a modified Penman equation.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Phase 1 measured relative yields as a function of the electrical conductivity (salinity) of the irrigation water (ECiw). Data are cumulative totals collected during five harvests. The shaded areas represent the range of yields expected based on published salt tolerances.

View larger version (13K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Phase 1 measured yields as a function of the electrical conductivity (salinity) of the irrigation water (ECiw). Date are the same as in Fig. 4, except in absolute instead of relative terms.

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Observed relationship between relative yield and relative evapotranspiration as measured in the Phase 1 experiments. Ky is the yield response factor and ECiw is the electrical conductivity of the irrigation water.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Measured leaching fraction as a function of irrigation depth and electrical conductivity (salinity) of the irrigation water (ECiw). Data are from Phase 2 and are 50-d cumulative totals.

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Time variation of the drainage water salinity (ECdw) measured in selected alfalfa lysimeters during Phase 1. The dashed lines are steady-state model calculations.